Key Issues on Appeal:

1. Assessing Corporate Size: Whether the sentencing court erred by considering only the local operation's size and economic activity.
2. Parity Principle: Whether the court erred by applying the parity principle equally to corporate and individual defendants.

Facts:

• In September 2017, a 16-year-old employee suffered a spinal injury at a Dairy Queen owned by the respondent.
• The injury occurred due to her hair being entangled in the rotating spindle of an unguarded Blizzard machine.
• The safety guard on the machine had been removed against safety regulations.

Charges and Initial Sentence:

• The respondent was charged with two counts under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA).
• The Justice of the Peace found the respondent guilty of failing to ensure the machine was guarded (count 2) and acquitted on count 1.
• The Crown sought a $75,000 fine; the respondent was fined $7,500.

Appeal Court's Findings:

• The appeal court dismissed the Crown's appeal of the sentence.

Court of Appeal's Decision:

• Error 1: The appeal court incorrectly limited the consideration of the corporation's size to the local store. The proper approach involves assessing the corporation's overall size and economic activity.
• Error 2: The appeal court failed to address the trial court's error in treating corporate defendants as similar to individual defendants for parity purposes.
• Correct Sentence: The Court of Appeal imposed a $40,000 fine, considering the corporation's size, economic activity, and the severity of the incident and injuries.

Disposition:

• The appeal was allowed, and the sentence was varied to a fine of $40,000, plus the victim fine surcharge.